Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

TrashMan

Posted 02 October 2012 - 10:45 PM

In the last few discissions I noticed an irritatinbly high number of people who think that mages, once low on spells, are a total dead weight.

Time to disprove such flawed notions.

Lets for example take your average D&D spellcaster. Are spells his main thing? Yes. But that isn't the only thing he can do. The thing holding mack mages the most is their low amount of HP* and poeple not using them to their full potential

*something I have campaigning for from day 1 is that health is determined by CON alone and class has no bearing on it. This would make mages far more survivable in combat as tehy could have as much HP as a fighter.

One thing to decide when building a character (of any class) is what approach to take.- focus on maximizing it's strengths- focus on minimizing weakneses- balanced approach

Now, msot peoepl I know go for the first. Got a fighter? All the equipment and skilsl will be there to make him even stronger and more durable! Got a mage? All equipment and skills/feats go to makeing him a stronger spellcaster.

That is a valid aproach, but overspecialization is overrated. It works wonderfull as long as everything is going according to plan. But if it doesn't, if you loose that super-specialized tank - suddenly there's total chaos.

***

"A great man once said that Specialization is for insects, Mr. Riley. I believed it at the time. I always thought that any human being, man or woman, should be able to do a solid day's work at any task you set them to. Hunt a buck or catch a fish, hammer a nail, build a fire, change the dressing on a wound — I always believed that you had to be ready to do anything to survive."

***

Me? I prefer a more balanced approach. You loose a bit on the offensive side, but gain survivabiltiy and flexibility.

I'm gonna give a few example from D&D that work.

ToEE, Elven sorcerres Aquariliyane. Being an elf, she starts with weapon proficiency: longsword and has a dex bonus. So I give her 1 lvl of fighter and take Weapon Speacilization and Weapon Finesse (use DEX bonus for to-hit insted of STR).With spells like Blur and Mage Armor (this spell lasts the whole day) her AC is quite impressive (especially if you increase DEX even more or use bbracers of defense). Add Fire Shild, Gaseous form or similar if necessary, but for now let's discount spells, since we are talking about a depleted mage scenario (mage armor still applies tough).

She was quite competent in combat. Enough so that she could take on lesser enemies by herself.

Then we have Avernus. A human wizzard. He was worse in mele than her, but that's OK, because he had a different role to play. He had an enchanted repeating crossbow (in which he was given proficiency). With gloves of dexterity he was accurate enough with it (and it helped some of his tough spells and AC too). Most of all he was busy making scrolls and wands.When he was out of spells, he was far from useless.

I used both of them in ToEE extensively, not backtracting or resting untill my entire party was tired.I cleared enitre dungeon levels without spells and wihout dying.

***

What a mage can do even without spells:

- make and use items like wands and scrolls (plenty of usefull wands are cheap enough to make and start with 20 charges). They might cost gold and EXP, but EXP can be gained back fast enough (especailly since those lagging behind the group get more)- ranged support- mele distraction/support

Note that with combat manouvers being availlbe to every class, even a mage can get behind an enemy and attampt to trip him, or charge and knock him over.A character doesn't have to have to deal a huge amount of DPS to be usefull. A completely average character can turn the tide of battle with proper application.

Hypevosa

Posted 02 October 2012 - 10:53 PM

Hypevosa

(4) Theurgist

Members

262 posts

Location:Cornfields of Ada

Xbox Gamertag:Hypevosa DSG

as long as you can still specialize the mage with a sling or some other ranged weapon, they'll still be useful.

The main problem is they're so damn squishy that, unless they're killing something so it doesn't hit them, they're dying - any ranger or other such creature just puts them down so fast... perhaps, if they could at least equip armor to get the benefit from it, even if they couldn't cast while wearing it, they could then be useful again instead of dying quickly and just being an inconvenience as you attempt to have them run away.

Hypevosa

Posted 02 October 2012 - 11:29 PM

There was a long discussion with one of the devs - characters will run out of spells during fights if the idea doesn't radically change before they start programming it.

I never read that, do you have a link to the comment/blog or whatever it was? I would like to read it.

Also, how can someone run out of soul? Spells are meant to be soul powered after all.

"Captain Shrek, on 02 October 2012 - 08:22 PM, said:

Well not directly but they are at least as bad if not worse like some of the save or die and if you survive then worse; get nerfed variety. But we are diverting. The point is that the wizard can then no longer have any spell which will be meta-effect like hold since that will always mean instawin with spam since you would have many such spells (unless the decision is to cut spell variety so that player can't use them). To avoid that and introduce some challenge I can see that you will have to force nerfed damage spells. Which are fine in my book as long as the combat is balanced, right?

EDIT: And I must bid good night! Thanks for your time. I hope it was well spent.Why would you be able to instawin by spamming? A theoretical 12th level wizard in PE will probably have about the same number of 5th level spell slots as an equivalent wizard in D&D. Let's say that's 2 or 3. In IWD, you could cast Hold Monster your two or three times in a row and then you'd be done casting 5th level spells for the fight. It would work the same way in PE. The main mechanical difference that I'm considering is when/how you regain your 5th level spells following the fight."

Assume it's the strength of your soul bending the magic to your will. You don't run out of soul so much as your soul fatigues.

You will run out of spells during a fight by his description, it's how you'll regain them after the fight that he's trying to put his finger on what they want.

Badmojo

Posted 02 October 2012 - 11:33 PM

Becoming slightly useless in a fight when out of spells is part of the trade-off for being very powerful when fully prepared, everything works as intended

It will be interesting to know how magic even works in Eternity, who knows, their might not even be a situation when a character is out of spells.

There was a long discussion with one of the devs - characters will run out of spells during fights if the idea doesn't radically change before they start programming it.

So basically, mages are going to be nerfed like usual, sucks for us who play mage characters...like usual. Also, they said we can play solo, so I would like them to explain how a mage could go through a game solo without being forced to learn something unmagey things. Someone explained mages as glass cannons, they are super powerful, but they are weak physically, that was the trade off. I do agree to a point, but they dont need to be so weak that one hit kills mages (I have had that happen in a few games...I was like, what the hell just happened?!?!?!). They did say mages would wear armour, which I suppose is good, but I an not a fan of them being forced to use swords or other wepons, that is another class all together.

Hypevosa

Posted 02 October 2012 - 11:35 PM

Becoming slightly useless in a fight when out of spells is part of the trade-off for being very powerful when fully prepared, everything works as intended

It will be interesting to know how magic even works in Eternity, who knows, their might not even be a situation when a character is out of spells.

There was a long discussion with one of the devs - characters will run out of spells during fights if the idea doesn't radically change before they start programming it.

So basically, mages are going to be nerfed like usual, sucks for us who play mage characters...like usual. Also, they said we can play solo, so I would like them to explain how a mage could go through a game solo without being forced to learn something unmagey things. Someone explained mages as glass cannons, they are super powerful, but they are weak physically, that was the trade off. I do agree to a point, but they dont need to be so weak that one hit kills mages (I have had that happen in a few games...I was like, what the hell just happened?!?!?!). They did say mages would wear armour, which I suppose is good, but I an not a fan of them being forced to use swords or other wepons, that is another class all together.

Sounds like mages are the same, but, instead of needing to rest whenever you want to regain spells, they'll slowly creep back. It's ultimately the same thing if it takes 24 hours for all of your 3 level 9 spell slots to return.

Badmojo

Posted 03 October 2012 - 01:12 AM

So basically, mages are going to be nerfed like usual, sucks for us who play mage characters...like usual.

That's not nerfing you <CENSORED>.

You nuke a room full of baddies, wield powers beyond comprehension of most mortals.. and you call yourself nerfed because you can't spam them forever?Seriously?

They did say mages would wear armour, which I suppose is good, but I an not a fan of them being forced to use swords or other wepons, that is another class all together.

No it's not. You have a strange notion that a mage must do nothing but fling spells constantly and be compeltely incompetent and worthless in doing anything else, otherwise he's not a mage.

You also have a notion that magic must be a super-special awesoem weapon that is unlimited.

I beg to differ.

Well, <CENSORED> to you too. I do think mages are nerfed a lot of times, spending half a fight having to hide in a corner because you are limited on how many times you can use a spell or run out of mana while fighters can swing all day. The only time mages are really powerful is when they can do area wide attacks (which is only when you are high leveled) getting a lot of enemies at once, otherwise they are pretty vulnerable for attacks and the damage dealt to individual magical attacks is usually not much better than the fighter who can use unlimited spam attack with his glowing sword of holly rightous furry. Oh, use a wepon besides magic? great, so my mage who has spend how many years of learning magic to bend the universe to his will is now suddenly reduced to no better than the weakest of fighters. Here is a thought, why don't we have fighters run out of physical attacks and are forced to use magic to be fair.

Volourn

Posted 03 October 2012 - 01:34 AM

Volourn

Arch-Mage

Members

17067 posts

Location:North Bay, Ontario, Kanada

Mages aren';t nerfed - at least not in D7D. They are the most powerful and most dangerous class in the game - even at low levels. A 1st level mage can cast a spell like sleep which is an auto win button versus the low level monsters PCs face at that time.

A 1st level mage has the same thaco (or attack bonus) of a 1st level warrior. A crossbow bolt does pretty good damage. Yeah, they have low hit points but to cry about the one actual weakness of the class is pretty silly.

"Here is a thought, why don't we have fighters run out of physical attacks and are forced to use magic to be fair. "

Here's a thought: the diea that magic = physical/real world stuff is nonsense from whichever need you are agruing it. It should be treated the same.

NerdBoner

Posted 03 October 2012 - 01:59 AM

NerdBoner

(5) Thaumaturgist

Members

463 posts

So basically, mages are going to be nerfed like usual, sucks for us who play mage characters...like usual. Also, they said we can play solo, so I would like them to explain how a mage could go through a game solo without being forced to learn something unmagey things. Someone explained mages as glass cannons, they are super powerful, but they are weak physically, that was the trade off. I do agree to a point, but they dont need to be so weak that one hit kills mages (I have had that happen in a few games...I was like, what the hell just happened?!?!?!). They did say mages would wear armour, which I suppose is good, but I an not a fan of them being forced to use swords or other wepons, that is another class all together.

this kind of whining makes me think you have obviously never played infinity engine games, either that or you just don't know how to play mages...because if you did you'd know that mages and sorcerer's were so damn overpowered they were near game breaking.

soloing a mage through Baldur's gate is easy peezy, soloing a fighter a cleric or a bard? not so much...

TrashMan

Posted 03 October 2012 - 02:34 AM

TrashMan

Holy Avenger of the Obsidian Order

Members

1523 posts

Location:Nabeshins afro

I do think mages are nerfed a lot of times, spending half a fight having to hide in a corner because you are limited on how many times you can use a spell or run out of mana while fighters can swing all day.

They don't HAVE to hide in the corner. YOU choose to hide in the corner. YOU choose to build them as glass cannon.I'll grant you that D&D does make it difficult for mages with thhe small HP, but it can be worked around.

The only time mages are really powerful is when they can do area wide attacks (which is only when you are high leveled) getting a lot of enemies at once, otherwise they are pretty vulnerable for attacks and the damage dealt to individual magical attacks is usually not much better than the fighter who can use unlimited spam attack with his glowing sword of holly rightous furry. Oh, use a wepon besides magic? great, so my mage who has spend how many years of learning magic to bend the universe to his will is now suddenly reduced to no better than the weakest of fighters. Here is a thought, why don't we have fighters run out of physical attacks and are forced to use magic to be fair.

Jsut because you don't do 5d6 damage to 10 people every round doesn't make a mage worthless.Mages are powerhouses if palyed properly.Mages have things to do even wihotu spells. You might think that 1d4 - 1d10 damage to a single enemy (depending on weapon) is insignificant, but it adds up. It can change the tide of battle easily is applied properly.

I don't get it why you are so opposed to mages runnign out of magic and having to use occasionly weapons? So what? What exactly do you gain by having a endlessly spammable single magic missile? Does that make your mage feel powerfull? Hell no!

PsychoBlonde

Posted 03 October 2012 - 03:00 AM

PsychoBlonde

Grand Rhetorist of the Obsidian Order

Members

525 posts

Location:Ohio

ToEE, Elven sorcerres Aquariliyane. Being an elf, she starts with weapon proficiency: longsword and has a dex bonus. So I give her 1 lvl of fighter and take Weapon Speacilization and Weapon Finesse (use DEX bonus for to-hit insted of STR).With spells like Blur and Mage Armor (this spell lasts the whole day) her AC is quite impressive (especially if you increase DEX even more or use bbracers of defense). Add Fire Shild, Gaseous form or similar if necessary, but for now let's discount spells, since we are talking about a depleted mage scenario (mage armor still applies tough).

*sigh*

1. You can't use the Weapon Finesse feat with a longsword.2. You can't take the Weapon Specialization feat without FOUR levels of fighter AND Weapon Focus.3. Gaseous Form makes it impossible for you to attack and do damage. It is strictly a stealth/locomotion spell.4. Mage Armor doesn't stack with Bracers of Armor--both grant an Armor bonus.

If you're going to blither about how to build a mage who can function without spells, it helps if you actually know the system you're talking about.If you want to build a truly functional 3.0 or 3.5 D&D fallback for an elven wizard or sorcerer, though, you pick up a longbow. No need for a feat, because the bow already uses dex for your to-hit bonus. Greater Magic Weapon, Bracers of Archery, and Tenser's Transformation can help make up for the serious base attack bonus deficit that wizards have (particularly at higher levels). And, of course, if you're 21st level or better, you can Shapechange into a Solar which gives you DR 15/epic and evil, fly 150 (good), immunity to acid, cold, and petrification, regeneration 15, resist electricity and fire 10, and spell resistance 32 just for starters. Not to mention +21 natural armor, +18 strength, +10 dex, and +10 con. Ahh, Shapechange. The original "I win everything" spell. Lasts all day. Lets you turn into any creature of less than deity status. So, so broken.

Casters being near-useless once they are "out" of spells is actually a DESIRABLE condition, part of a functional game balance in games where casters have many, varied, POWERFUL spells. It is the ONLY thing holding them back. Otherwise casters are absolutely the most powerful classes across the board no contest. They can make themselves immune to just about everything and always kick out mass destruction. If they run into trouble, there's always the Emergency Contingency Plan known as Teleport. And then they go and give wizards spells like Invisibility and Knock. Why even have a rogue when the poor schmuck has to spend an hour taking 20 to open the lock but the wizard can get it open in 3 seconds?

And don't even get me started on clerics. My cleric arcane archer in Dungeons and Dragons Online is a healer AND an offensive/defensive caster AND ranged DPS--about the only things she can't really do well are tank an epic raid and disarm traps (and if I wanted to make the effort, she could do those TOO.) I challenge you to find a non-caster character who can make that kind of claim.

When people are talking about caster fugue, they're not COMPLAINING about it. They are trying to come up with ways to arrange for it to happen so they can a.) get cool, powerful, flashy spells and b.) also have some point to playing a class OTHER than a caster. Everybody knows how to make their caster useful when they're OOM. The trick is designing a system where the fighters and rogues aren't just a cheering section.

NerdBoner

Posted 03 October 2012 - 03:01 AM

I'll grant you that D&D does make it difficult for mages with thhe small HP, but it can be worked around.

unless you are a lunatic who leaps head first into every encounter without even attempting to measure your capacity versus that of your foe then your mage shouldn't even be taking hits...

mages, at lower levels, are meant to be guarded from fodder and unleashed when necessary... at higher levels they should be nigh unstoppable and require no protection save what they can get from their own spells.

Osvir

Posted 03 October 2012 - 03:15 AM

Osvir

Arch-Mage

Members

3799 posts

Location:Stockholm, SE

I personally love Mage's exactly as they are in Baldur's Gate, IWD. I just want them to be able to throw spells a little bit more (without rest spamming, that is another topic, this post is just an opinion thing).

MReed

Posted 03 October 2012 - 03:26 AM

MReed

(4) Theurgist

Members

398 posts

Keep in mind, folks, that mages in P:E are already known to be much more combat effective characters than in D&D -- we've been specifically told that mages commonly wear heavy armor (full plate level) due to guns making their previous arcane defenses inadequate. I'd judge it likely that the "Gandalf" version of mages (can cast spells and fight more conventionally) is far closer to the developers vision than the standard D&D "hide in the corner when you run out of spells" version.